Punishing Criminals

I have long thought that deterring crime is the best justification for punishing criminal adults in society.

In line with this I also have long thought that, in serious crimes, punishing the criminal, through bodily, I guess you might say, mutilation, in some way might be a good way of accomplishing this.
Note: I am not talking of Torture, but surgery.

For example:

For any kind of aggravated assault, where the person severely harmed another, in a purposeful and inhumane manner, such as calculated rape, "real" hate crimes, etc. The person ought to lose a digit or two. If they shot people, their trigger finger. If they rape people their instrument.

I feel like this would not only deter people from commiting crimes, but make it harder for people to continue harming others.
Imagine trying to assault someone with a poor grip. Or shooting someone without your trigger finger.

Now of course the courts are not perfect, and such punishments would be quite permanent, so I think that such things should only be instituted for the most solid of cases, and perhaps realistically, in our justice system, not at all, but I think in theory they are Just, and in a case where the person is guilty of said crimes that is what ought to happen.

At 11/6/2009 11:55:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
I have long thought that deterring crime is the best justification for punishing criminal adults in society.

In line with this I also have long thought that, in serious crimes, punishing the criminal, through bodily, I guess you might say, mutilation, in some way might be a good way of accomplishing this.
Note: I am not talking of Torture, but surgery.

For example:

For any kind of aggravated assault, where the person severely harmed another, in a purposeful and inhumane manner, such as calculated rape, "real" hate crimes, etc. The person ought to lose a digit or two. If they shot people, their trigger finger. If they rape people their instrument.

I feel like this would not only deter people from commiting crimes, but make it harder for people to continue harming others.
Imagine trying to assault someone with a poor grip. Or shooting someone without your trigger finger.

Now of course the courts are not perfect, and such punishments would be quite permanent, so I think that such things should only be instituted for the most solid of cases, and perhaps realistically, in our justice system, not at all, but I think in theory they are Just, and in a case where the person is guilty of said crimes that is what ought to happen.

I agree!

No. If you didn't realise, body parts are useful for other things other than the crime they were utilised in. Taking away their digits is scarring them for life and will prevent them from getting employment. It's an overtly cruel crime.

If someone shoots someone, take away their gun.
If someone rapes someone, give them have a curfew.

At 11/6/2009 12:18:35 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
No. If you didn't realise, body parts are useful for other things other than the crime they were utilised in. Taking away their digits is scarring them for life and will prevent them from getting employment. It's an overtly cruel crime.

If someone shoots someone, take away their gun.
If someone rapes someone, give them have a curfew.

It very well might affect other areas of their life, and as such they would not wish to commit more crimes, and be further impaired.
For murderers in Prison, they would not aspire to killing gaurds,
for rapists who delight in controlling others, they might have good reason to control themselves.
For "gangsters" killing and doing time, spraying "gats" would not be a badge of honor but rather a huge impairment and something which makes you increasingly useless to all who might formerly have idolized you. And all would think twice before they comitted themselves to such action.

Good thing that Matrodsam doesn't have any influence over judicial policy.

By the way, do you have any relation to Cody Franklin?

lol.. no.
From what I hear he's a fascist.

Im a libertarian ; ) lol.

At 11/6/2009 12:41:12 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

At 11/6/2009 12:18:35 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
No. If you didn't realise, body parts are useful for other things other than the crime they were utilised in. Taking away their digits is scarring them for life and will prevent them from getting employment. It's an overtly cruel crime.

If someone shoots someone, take away their gun.
If someone rapes someone, give them have a curfew.

It very well might affect other areas of their life, and as such they would not wish to commit more crimes, and be further impaired.

I think a progressively longer jail sentences with each crime committed, along with state help getting back on your feet can suffice.

For murderers in Prison, they would not aspire to killing gaurds,

Or woudl they try and get revenge on the people who took away their fingers? You do also realise there's more than one way to shoot a gun?

for rapists who delight in controlling others, they might have good reason to control themselves.

Taking away someone's reproductive choice is not only taking away a fundamental part of being human, it's also preventing them from continuing on with life

For "gangsters" killing and doing time, spraying "gats" would not be a badge of honor but rather a huge impairment and something which makes you increasingly useless to all who might formerly have idolized you. And all would think twice before they comitted themselves to such action.

Actually, gangsters tend to work around these things and would make it a badge of honour.

Furthermore, do you propose people's whole limbs be cut off? It smells of a suppressive dictatorship.

The Yakuza has a well known history of making a badge of honor out of chopping their fingers off THEMSELVES, so providing this service to criminals free of charge is obviously a bad idea. More useful forms of mutilation, I have no particular problem with.

Panda: Suppressive dictatorship? Suppressive of what? Of murder rape and theft? Regardless of political structure, it is the entire point of government to suppress these things. If you do not believe they should be suppressed, you may as well be an anarchist.

whole limbs!
no not really, I would hope that before someone worked through all of their fingers, they would be given the death penalty.

Again this is with the hypothetical certainty that these people have all committed heinously cruel crimes, consistently denying other people of their humanity.

At 11/6/2009 1:00:50 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Panda: Suppressive dictatorship? Suppressive of what? Of murder rape and theft? Regardless of political structure, it is the entire point of government to suppress these things. If you do not believe they should be suppressed, you may as well be an anarchist.

If I told you burglars had their hands cut off somewhere, what country woudl spring to mind? Saudi Arabia? Iran?

The punishment needs to fit the crime, and there's such a thing as too harsh a punishment. If it will impair them physically, then it's infringing on their ability to re-normalise into life. If they can't get employed, they turn to stealing again, and the cycle perpetually continues.